ISO/IEC Website and Charging for C and C++ Standards -

-

the iso c standard (iso/iec 9899) , iso c++ standard (iso/iec 14882) not published online; instead, 1 must purchase pdf each of standards. wondering rationale behind this... not detrimental both c , c++ programming languages authoritative specification these languages not made freely available , searchable online? doesn't encourage use of possibly inaccurate, non-authoritative sources information regarding these languages?

while understand time , effort has gone developing c , c++ standards, still puzzled choice charge specification. opengroup base specification, example, available free online; make money charging certification. know why iso standards committees don't make revenue in certifying standards compliance, instead of charging these documents? also, know if iso standards committee's atrociously looking website intentionally made way? it's if don't want people visiting , buying spec.

one last thing... c , c++ standards described "open standards"... while realize means permitted implement standard, should definition of "open" revised? charging standard rather making openly available seems contrary spirit of openness.

p.s. have copy of iso/iec 9899:1999 , iso/iec 14882:2003, please no remarks being cheap or anything... although if tempted such things, might want consider high school, undergraduate, , graduate students might not have cash. also, might want consider fact iso website sketchy , don't tell cost until proceed checkout... doesn't encourage 1 go , copy, it?

edit / comment
occurs me if iso standards committees make revenues certification incentivize smaller more frequent changes standard rather large revisions infrequently. incentivize creating implementable standard (i doubt iso c++ committee have introduced "export" in first place if got revenues certification).

i have found solution 1 of annoyances of not having pdf online.... have uploaded copy of standards google docs, can still access computer without carrying around.

for it's worth, herb sutter wrote article touching on issue, , there's fair bit of discussion in comments:

as mentions, "open" not mean "no-cost". far students or others limited financial means might want free versions of thee documents, note that:

  1. many references students may want (or required access) not free
  2. for work, standards aren't requirement - there plenty of freely available documentation more adequate of work might want c or c++
  3. the draft documents freely downloadable in many cases; while aren't the standard, final draft versions close , might enough lot of uses.

if you're serious c or c++ programming, i'd suggest should have copy of standards (though wouldn't it's requirement). i'd suggest there shouldn't expectation they'd free, occupation or avocation 'tools of trade' not free - whether tools physical objects hammers, or information such manuals or specifications.

in fact, i'd argue set of references preferable set of standards, if have 1 or other or you're starting out (you'd want couple different ones c++, while harbison & steele that's needed c).

don't me wrong - i'm not opposed them being made freely available (and i'm happy they're rather inexpensive), don't think there's reason expect them free.

the answers question, "where find current c or c++ standard documents?", have pointers cheap versions , free draft versions. note current c99 standard (with tc1 , tc2 incorporated) available free download:

there's note n1124 "is wg14 working paper, reflects consolidated standard @ time of issue".


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

javascript - Enclosure Memory Copies -

-
function myclass() { //lots , lots of vars , code here. this.bar = function() { //do numerous enclosed myclass vars } this.foo = function() { alert('hello'); //don't enclosed variables. } } each instance of myclass gets own copy of bar , foo, why prototyped methods use less memory. however, know more memory use of inner methods. it seems obvious me (1) below must true. agree? not distinct myclass instances have own distinct copies of bar, must have own distinct copies of myclass enclosure. (or else how bar method keep myclass variables straight on per instance basis?) now (2) question i'm after. since inner foo method doesn't use in myclass enclosure natural qustion is: javascript smart enough not keep myclass enclosure in memory use of foo? this depend entirely on implementation not language. naive implementations keep far more around others. answer true e.g. v8 (chrome's js engine) may not true spider...
Read more

php - Replacing tags in braces, even nested tags, with regex -

-
example preg_replace('/\{[a-za-z.,\(\)0-9]+\}/', 'replaced', 'lorem ipsum dolor sit {tag1({tag2()})}, consectetur adipiscing elit.'); the result: lorem ipsum dolor sit {tag1(replaced)}, consectetur adipiscing elit. question as can see "tag2" has been replaced, want replace "tag1" know how can this? (in cases might this: {tag1({tag2({tag3()})})}) , on.) btw using preg_replace_callback, easier show preg_replace here site can test code: http://www.spaweditor.com/scripts/regex/index.php you need add curly braces character set. here's pattern used: /\{[a-za-z.,\(\)\{\}0-9]+\}/ and here result: "lorem ipsum dolor sit replaced, consectetur adipiscing elit."
Read more